Really? I'll take a biff on this, but isn't that a knock? What's with not scoring much for a guy with good 3 %?

Literally any team in the league can have him today. Why no takers?

Defense.
He's an amazing shooter but doesn't look to shoot too often...I think he's more concerned about setting up a play.
Good rebounder for his position too (got a triple double this year when Lowry was out)

Also, Calderon is 31. So he's not future point gaurd material, but at least he's decent starting PG material.

Not good D and old. Kind of like Tinsley, who is way worse and everybody loves.

"I'm a moron for thinking the Browns could even sniff 10 wins in a division where the other three teams (two of whom almost always make the playoffs) made the post-season last year. Gyp Rosetti's thee God of football knowledge." - Brown Notes

The most important thing a PG can do is distribute. The second most important thing they can do, almost as important as passing, is having the ability to shoot from the outside. Every decent PG we've ever had fit these two criteria (Stockton, Williams, Crotty, Eisley to a much lesser extent [not as much passing]). We've picked up a number of guys that are proficient passers but not shooters and it hasn't been all that great (Mark Jackson, Brevin Knight, Earl Watson, Jacque Vaughn), then we pick up a few guys that few guys that do neither (Price, Hart), then there are a couple that are more difficult to evaluate due to limited time (Arroyo, Lopez, Mo Williams to an extent).

I think Calderon is a no brainer. Maybe he can't play defense, but if he can distribute and then just stand there and simply be a threat to hit from the outside.

The most important thing a PG can do is distribute. The second most important thing they can do, almost as important as passing, is having the ability to shoot from the outside. Every decent PG we've ever had fit these two criteria (Stockton, Williams, Crotty, Eisley to a much lesser extent [not as much passing]). We've picked up a number of guys that are proficient passers but not shooters and it hasn't been all that great (Mark Jackson, Brevin Knight, Earl Watson, Jacque Vaughn), then we pick up a few guys that few guys that do neither (Price, Hart), then there are a couple that are more difficult to evaluate due to limited time (Arroyo, Lopez, Mo Williams to an extent).

I think Calderon is a no brainer. Maybe he can't play defense, but if he can distribute and then just stand there and simply be a threat to hit from the outside.

the questions are these:

1. what would the jazz give up this year to acquire him?
2. what would it take to get him to SLC as a free agent?

As per 1: IMO, the realistic list is limited to our own expiring contracts. Essentially, the teams agree to swap dudes that probably won't be on their teams next year. Millsap is more valuable and productive than Calderon, so that deal is off the table; TOR isn't giving more than Calderon to acquire Millsap because they most likely won't be able to retain him. As I've already said, I'd swap him and Al immediately; but the only way that goes down is if TOR moves Bargs or another big man, because they aren't in need at the moment.

As per 2: Do the jazz have to give an extra year? Do we have to pay too much? I'd absolutely hate a 4-year deal. I'd hate a 3-year deal for the wrong price. Maybe he comes here for the right price at two years since he sees an opportunity to start for a competitive team, but that is a hard bargain.

My only interest is an Al swap. That'll at least give him an audition before we were to negotiate our own contract.

1. what would the jazz give up this year to acquire him?
2. what would it take to get him to SLC as a free agent?

As per 1: IMO, the realistic list is limited to our own expiring contracts. Essentially, the teams agree to swap dudes that probably won't be on their teams next year. Millsap is more valuable and productive than Calderon, so that deal is off the table; TOR isn't giving more than Calderon to acquire Millsap because they most likely won't be able to retain him. As I've already said, I'd swap him and Al immediately; but the only way that goes down is if TOR moves Bargs or another big man, because they aren't in need at the moment.

As per 2: Do the jazz have to give an extra year? Do we have to pay too much? I'd absolutely hate a 4-year deal. I'd hate a 3-year deal for the wrong price. Maybe he comes here for the right price at two years since he sees an opportunity to start for a competitive team, but that is a hard bargain.

My only interest is an Al swap. That'll at least give him an audition before we were to negotiate our own contract.

Don't really know or care. I'd just like to move Al to begin moving forward as it would free us up this year and force us not to resign.

1. what would the jazz give up this year to acquire him?
2. what would it take to get him to SLC as a free agent?

As per 1: IMO, the realistic list is limited to our own expiring contracts. Essentially, the teams agree to swap dudes that probably won't be on their teams next year. Millsap is more valuable and productive than Calderon, so that deal is off the table; TOR isn't giving more than Calderon to acquire Millsap because they most likely won't be able to retain him. As I've already said, I'd swap him and Al immediately; but the only way that goes down is if TOR moves Bargs or another big man, because they aren't in need at the moment.

As per 2: Do the jazz have to give an extra year? Do we have to pay too much? I'd absolutely hate a 4-year deal. I'd hate a 3-year deal for the wrong price. Maybe he comes here for the right price at two years since he sees an opportunity to start for a competitive team, but that is a hard bargain.

My only interest is an Al swap. That'll at least give him an audition before we were to negotiate our own contract.

Great post.
I would add that there is already a need for toronto at the 4/5 position even if they keep bargnani.... Jonas is injured and not playing much anyways and jefferson is an upgrade (debateable) for toronto over davis, johnson, jonas, or gray and possibly even bargnani.

However if that trade happened then the raptors would be starting john lucas III. (since lowry is hurt) Not sure they would want to do that.
Maybe we have to throw in watson or tinsley too.

Really? I'll take a biff on this, but isn't that a knock? What's with not scoring much for a guy with good 3 %?

Literally any team in the league can have him today. Why no takers?

You're assuming a lot. The Raptors have been trying to find a player to replace him for years (probably as step one in exploring an actual trade attempt) and regardless of who they try to bring in, Calderon always rises to the top. You can call it a coincidence that the Raptors suddenly look competent with Lowry out and Calderon having a sort of explosion, but I wouldn't.

The guy is a good player. Offensively, the closest thing to prototypical PG in the league despite his poor D.

"I will say, almost everything. And I didnít bring it every night. But I think most everything was a frustration."

So, what could be different about Tinsley that would bust your analogy?

Tinsley can't shoot and is one of the worst defensive players in the league (way worse than Calderon). And quite a bit older. And can't impact the game with any kind of consistency (he'll look great [as great as he can, anyway] one night, then be invisible the next. This might have to do with his age and that his battery is poor).

"I will say, almost everything. And I didnít bring it every night. But I think most everything was a frustration."